§ The result
HiBob leads Turing by 10 points.
HiBob sits 10 points above Turing under rubric v1.0 — 46 against 36 — with HiBob filed under ATS-integrated and Turing under Assessment. HiBob leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Turing leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap (HiBob 47, Turing 27) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (HiBob 55, Turing 42), 22% of the weighted advantage HiBob builds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
HiBob
HiBob's Bob is an all-in-one HR platform whose Bob Hiring applicant tracking module uses AI to give each application an explainable match score against recruiter-defined criteria (AI CV Matching) and to draft job descriptions, interview scorecards and candidate emails.
Vendor profile
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
HiBob is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Turing under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Turing is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HiBob | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 20% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiBob 55 · Turing 42
2.6 weighted points to HiBob
12% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiBob 47 · Turing 27
2.4 weighted points to HiBob
12% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiBob 63 · Turing 45
2.2 weighted points to HiBob
15% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiBob 57 · Turing 44
1.9 weighted points to HiBob
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiBob 35 · Turing 25
1.5 weighted points to HiBob
18% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiBob 20 · Turing 28
1.4 weighted points to Turing
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiBob 61 · Turing 48
1.0 weighted points to HiBob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +10.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +10.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiBob minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | HiBob | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 42 | +13 | +2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 28 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 44 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 45 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 27 | +20 | +2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 61 | 48 | +13 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 36 (F) | +10 | +10.2 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | HiBob | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 29 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HiBob has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 29 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for HiBob, across 4 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiBob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next